Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash initialization

From:

strk

Subject:

Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash initialization

Date:

Fri, 5 Nov 2010 10:26:17 +0100

On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 10:08:14AM +0100, Benjamin Wolsey wrote:
> > I was thinking these days that the time may have come to drop requirement
> > of this 2-steps start.
>
> Sounds good to me. I think the only difference to my proposed startup
> design would be that everything is passed to createMovie() and that the
> MovieRun always has a movie_root (which is a much better guarantee).
I'd try to think about different names. I don't like the word "Movie"
above. I don't think you're creating a movie. Most probably
you're setting up a stage. You're renting a theater to let the show
happen. Not even knowing the stage size in advance, btw.
I wonder if just instantiating a movie_root would do that already.
In that case the factory you're suggesting would pretty much be
a movie_rootFactory (yes, it's time to rename movie_root ;P)
> But I'm currently not sure what implications it would have for users or
> what extra requirements it would place on existing classes.
Eh.. me neither, but I belive it'd be worth giving it a try to avoid
designing a whole new abstraction to fight with dragons that might be
dead already.
--strk;
() Free GIS & Flash consultant/developer
/\ http://strk.keybit.net/services.html